Compendium of all NS ideologies and manifestos.

by **Nasania** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:01 am

In this thread I am going to post all NationStates ideologies. Contained will be spoilers to each ideologies founding documents, media outlets, and manifestos. Feel free to post links to them below or mention them so I can go find them and here.

Why? I am designing new ideology tests and would like all ideologies and would like them to be fairly represented in such. Some ideology tests won't be necessary(there are already many socialism/capitalism tests out there due to its existence in Real Life.)

From there we could possibly determine even subcommunities or 'ideology families' in which several similar ideologies can be grouped together. E.g Maoism and Stalinism are often grouped under the Communist family of ideologies. In NS, Imperialism and Francoism could be classified as part of the Independent family of ideologies. Some ideologies may actually be a subset of two families.

In each ideology spoiler will be a brief summary of the ideology(what,who,when,where, why, and how). Its focus and policy areas of concern.

Anyway, here is list:

by **Zaolat** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:09 am

Imperialism is a sub branch of Independent

by **Consular** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:25 am

For francoism, you chose to link to the wiki of that game that shall not be named.

by **KaelThas Quilor** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:34 pm

Just because something calls itself something else (Centralism) doesn't mean its not another established ideology (Independence).

by **Valrifell** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:46 pm

KaelThas Quilor wrote:Just because something calls itself something else (Centralism) doesn't mean its not another established ideology (Independence).

Independence is such an incredibly broad term really. These ideologies might be slight variations on the same basic principle of Independence, but they still are different in some ways.

by **KaelThas Quilor** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 5:03 pm

That might be true - in which case they need to be categorized as subbranches of the same tree, in the same sense 'Lutheranism' 'Catholicism' 'Orthodox Christianity' and 'Oriental Orthodox Christianity' are all branches of the tree 'Christianity'.

Or, if you want a political example 'Stalinism' "Maoism' 'Trotskyism' and 'Lenininism' are all branchings of Communism.

by **Zaolat** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 5:10 pm

Valrifell wrote:
KaelThas Quilor wrote:Just because something calls itself something else (Centralism) doesn't mean its not another established ideology (Independence).

Independence is such an incredibly broad term really. These ideologies might be slight variations on the same basic principle of Independence, but they still are different in some ways.

Sure, but in practice I'd rather disagree with not including as a form of independence.

To break it down in simple terms, we have Neutrality which abstains from almost all forms of military gameplay. Defenders and Raiders, and Independents.

Merc can be argued as not the latter, but can be argued from both sides as either bi-gameplay or on the fence and should pick a side.

With Independent you have sub branches such as Imperialism and Colonialism.

With raiding you have purist raiding that takes a hardcore hardline and moderate raiding which is basically raid but be really nice about it like tagging the wfe but not erasing the old one.

Defending does have preemptive defending, rarely seen but TITO has raided and refounded raider regions, but they are still fendas. There is a very fine line on that last one but it can be argued by others.

I think the paradigm of having four simple terms for broad military gameplay alignment is simpler and variations fall in as branches of each tree.

Though I'm sure many will disagree with my thoughts on it.

Edit: Damn you Cerian!

by **Klaus Devestatorie** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 7:09 pm

Zaolat wrote:Imperialism is a sub branch of Independent

Someone likes trouble

by **KaelThas Quilor** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:37 pm

Ask any Imperialist, Avakael. They'd agree with that.

by **Consular** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:00 pm

KaelThas Quilor wrote:Ask any Imperialist, Avakael. They'd agree with that.

^

by **Nasania** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 1:54 am

Imperialism could actually fit in at least two branches, regionalism and independentism. In the Imperialism in Nationstates essay: “Imperialism is necessarily regionalist in outlook, even if many of its members are quite cosmopolitan and members of many regions. It is also primarily raider though it is not tied to notions of ‘raider unity’, or to ideas of every founderless region being a target, and when necessary an imperialist region will defend, for example when allies are threatened. An imperialist region need not necessarily be primarily raider but given defending is primarily a reactive process, rather than proactive, I think it would me much harder to pursue an imperialist policy without at least a general willingness to raid sometimes. ” Imperialism may have cosmopolitan members and may take cosmopolitan policies at times, yet is regionalist overall and never seems to reject regionalism. As for Raiderism, imperialists may practice raider policies, but they do not ascribe to raiderist philosophy and reject the 'raider unity' idea. The transcendant 'raid in of itself' is not the end goal making them distinct from raiderists.

The definition of Independence seems to be 'not Raider/Defender.' So many ideologies can be placed under that heading(RL ideologies in particular). Wrt to Centralism, I agree that it is independentism, yet it is still interesting that it labeled itself differently. The Regional Sovereigntists(from On Regional Sovereignty) could also be placed under the label of independentism. They are distinct from the imperialists though as they oppose imperialism(taking an almost Defenderist view of sovereignty).

by **The Blaatschapen** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 3:12 am

I miss 'Hedonism'.

And tacos.

by **KaelThas Quilor** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:34 am

Independence as an ideology is more than /just/ standing beyond the axis, Nas, and Imperialism is not a sub-branch of regionalism. You need to understand the ideological trees - Imperialism comes out of Independence but extends it with a specific emphasis on the projection of power. Regionalism is a far, far more general concept that is about nationalism and regional values.

by **Corvus Corax** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:53 am

One important ideology is missing from the list!

Puppetstorageism

- Pragmatist and universally cosmopolitan Gameplaying approach to all NS-regions
- Considers them as a meaningless in every other ways then they are natural places where all nations must reside
- Utilitarian perspective to a region, considering it as a tool/environment for a nation required for conducting higher gameplaying activities
- Ignores meaning of a region in every other way, but putting some value to a times possible to extract from such region, and a possibility to use it as a launching point and a destination of free movement of a free nation (again, used for higher gameplaying goals)
- National legistlative issues, flags, mottos, animals, factbooks, badges etc. are considered as a vain extra load of a national administration for to the purposes of the higher goals. Issues are important only for getting accurate times
- Pragmatist approach of a Puppetstorageist allows extensively experience different kind localities and regional settings of existence in a traveled/explored/altered puppet storages all around in the multiverse
- All Puppetstorageists are automatically cosmopolitans and free minded people by default, whom haven't even smallest traces left from their original regionalist stances and ties to a politically correct conventions of an establishments of The Game
- As an ideology, Puppetstorageism can be considered as a sub-category of Extreme Purist Raiderism with extra tag 'parody'

SEE THE MULTIVERSE AND EXPERIENCE IT NOW! MOVE YOUR PUPPET!

by **Yao** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:52 am

"Lazarene Communism" isn't a thing.

I will explain the three different schools of Lazarene thinking in a moment. It's critical to the culture and not many people actually get it.

Edit:

Socialism - This is more or less what Harm talked most about. In some ways, we adopted RL socialist ideology and applied it to the community. Your link, and the other article by Harm, are pretty good on this.

Permanent Revolution - This is more so my (OOC: Milograd's) shtick, and the one belief that is OOCly constant among all my personas. It's not really a Maoist thing, albeit Mao used language that made it a good fit for thematic fun.

The source of most decay and instability in GCR's comes when the leadership becomes too comfortable in its own system, and when the people become too complacent with whatever that is. You see this in Devonitians TSP and pre-OFO Osiris. I'd even argue current Osiris and TSP. You see it right now in The West Pacific, albeit - unusually, compared to a typical GCR - the Guardians are cognizant and proactive about it. That's why I'm there right now. For an instance of where constant revolution comes into play, one of the current shortcomings of the PRL is that it's too much like how it was during my delegacy -- my institutions were right for their time, but are they right for a Lazarus under Stujenske, post-Milograd? We don't think so, so changes are coming.

Lazarus is going to be undergoing some changes to move out of how I had things, and I have encouraged this wholeheartedly. Regions where things are the same from month to month are boring -- contrary to what people seem to think about my delegacy, the reason we succeeded is because I kept you on my toes. You couldn't anticipate just about anything beyond a general direction and everything was constantly subject to change. You had to log in and post every day if you wanted to have a sense of what Lazarus would be like the next day you woke up, and if you wanted to have a hand in deciding where that would be. I was changing things and, in an honest retrospective, I was happy to exploit paranoia to keep people paying attention and involved. DYP in particular, I'd say, got particularly active in the LLA probably thanks to worrying if I'd coup the place. No regrets on that front.

Now, in contrast, I think TNP and even, to some extent, TRR, are very successful because they change. Unibot being delegate in TRR - say what you will about him - brought a lot of internal changes while staying true to the general direction. He's also just a very effective bureaucrat-delegate, I'd say his style is akin to my own, albeit he works within democratic systems. In TNP, I think projects like the current endorsement plan are brave changes to the way we play the game, and the possibility of making those kind of grand projects is what keeps TNP an always-appealing place to be. But on top of that, the region's activity is pretty self-sustaining, to the extent that players in power aren't typically given much room to become lethargic.

Governing Style - Efficiency, Bureaucracy, Sovereignty - These are three different things, but it's typically a constant you'll see in Lazarene governance.

The first piece, efficiency, is pretty simple. Lazarus is a sinker and thus, we have a lot of deady-type nations. Being able to make swift decisions with a strong leadership is paramount to being able to keep the region active.

The second, bureaucracy, ties into the first. The Emerald Cabinet always used to be inactive because you'd see a godawful voting system needed to approve ministers. The Chairman of the PRL, in contrast, gets to appoint and fire ministers as needed, and it's generally been much more successful in keeping them involved. Most of the most active posts per day (not in spam forums) ministers in Lazarene history have been in the cabinet between now and October of 2013.

The third, and final piece, is sovereignty. This appears in both the defending ideology and the general willingness to be dictatorship. Lazarus does not invade because it would not want to be invaded. It helps invaded regions because it would want help if it was invaded. People who don't like it can go to a region that invades. Part of this sovereignty thing is that Lazarus is what it chooses to be, and it's no one else's business. International pressure to conform isn't looked upon kindly, and the regional identity isn't inclined to open itself up to erosion.

by **Shadoke** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:19 pm

You could invlude Henricism, if you would like

Compendium of all NS ideologies and manifestos.

Compendium of all NS ideologies and manifestos.

Who is online